DynamicArray destroy methods

[Julian C. Cummings]

Jim,

I was going to add new destroy() functions
to Particles corresponding to the new
IteratorPairDomain-based functions you 
added to DynamicArray.  I noticed three minor
glitches in DynamicArray.h that I was going
to fix, if you don't object.  One is on
line 486.  We don't need to provide the 
BackFill() argument here because dynamic 
engines already provide a destroy() function
that takes just a Domain argument.  (No harm
done here though, and I think this glitch
was here prior to your recent changes.)  The
next item is on line 501.  You left out the 
Pooma:: qualifier on the IteratorPairDomain
type.  It should be there for consistency,
although there is probably a "using namespace
Pooma;" statement somewhere that is making 
this work as written.  The last problem is on
line 542.  I think you do have to provide the
BackFill() argument here because MPEngine only
provides three versions of destroy(): domain,
domain and patchID, or domain, patchID and method.

I was trying to check out this third item when 
I ran into another problem.  Perhaps others can 
chime in on this.  I modified dynamic_array_test5.cpp
to call destroy() without specifying a method.  So
I made calls with arguments (int*,int*) and with
(vector<int>::iterator,vector<int>::iterator,int).
The first call should invoke destroy() with Iter
equal to int* (DynamicArray.h, line 498), but gcc 
says the overload is ambiguous with the version on
line 477 also being plausible.  I thought matching
one template parameter always beats matching two.
With my second call, I was trying to invoke the
destroy() function on line 538 of DynamicArray.h,
but gcc thinks the version on line 491 is a good
match also.  Again I am surprised because PatchID_t
is defined as int, and that exactly matches the
type of my third argument.  What's the deal?

Julian C.